Sorry, didn't see you there. I don't come in here often!

My thread on much the same monitor, which I'm still looking at:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=741



I still hold the same opinion. The colour seriously sucks, but I just can't justify spending the serious cash required to get a better monitor and I LOVE the resolution.

I don't really game, and given my on-board graphics frame rates aren't something I'm concerned about. Full screen 720p anime looks good, provided you keep your head in the sweet spot. If you get too close then the colour varies from top to bottom with the angle, lol.

Only thing is, after a few months it now appears to have shrunk. It looked big when I got it

How could you run the old monitor in clone mode? It has a lower resolution...

LCDs always show blurry images, when they aren't run at their native resolution. If you have a 1920x1200 display and drive it at 1680x1050, it is no wonder that it looks blurred, compared to the old one running at its native resolution...

i set the new one to its native and the old to its native too, just on the old screen you had to move the mouse over to the edge of the screen to move the picture (so sorta like a scroll bar)

so new 2048x1152 and the old 1680x1050 and compared them for blur

i take it were talking about the samsung

i found the viewing angles pretty good on mine and the gradients to be reasonably good its a really nice screen appart from the blur

i run mine off dvi which its really sharp, but just to test i ran it through vga and it was terrible, text and screen was blurry

but for the the size of it i love it to bits, its a fantasic size and res screen, hence why i want one exactly the same size ^^ im hoping the dell may do better favours for the blur with its 2ms response time

Okay, that makes a bit more sense. "Cloned" mode means that both monitors display the same image at the same resolution, that's why I thought the test was invalid.

Is the new monitor on a DVI or HDMI link or VGA? Again, VGA is a lousy way to drive a monitor over 1280x1024...

its run through DVI

ive got an rma on it through scan and its going back on monday for a refund, its actually giving me a bad head there is so much blur, distorts text in games i play so makes it harder to focus on reading it

I'm running what I think is the same panel but without the DVI, hence it being only £150 because of the retarded DVI tax on screens "quite obviously used for entertainment" wtf retard tax people die kill die.

My sub-D connection has no flutter or blurriness at all, despite it controlling 2048 horizontal pixels from cheap on-board graphics. If anything, the problem is with 1 pixel text looking like spider writing because the dots are so tiny and accurate.

I did have problems with pixel alignment on a very old PC, but the graphics in that were from the 1990s. It actually had 50Hz mains modulation showing through, causing banding on a TFT monitor. Of course, it looked perfect on a CRT. TFTs were not invented when the Rage Pro came out!

I would prefer DVI, but on a side-by-side comparison on my Dell Ultra-Sharp I seriously could not tell the difference in sharpness, and I have pixel-perfect alignment on this setup. I think the colours were compromised a little on the Dell, but I can't compare on this screen because I don't have the option. Bloody stupid tax grumble grumble...

well its gone back and im just waiting for the refund.

only bad things i can find about the dell are backlight bleed on the bottom and bad viewing angles, anyone else got one of these or can recommend a good 23" 2049x1162 monitor with fast response times

been looking at the new LED backlight monitors and they look very impressive

strung between the

Samsung SyncMaster XL2370
http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors/sa ... l?tag=also

and

LG Flatron W2486L
http://reviews.cnet.com/lcd-monitors/lg ... l?tag=also

samsung supposedly faired better but i cant find any other retailer apart from amazon and i don't trust them for big things lol

I have the 24" version of the Samsung (1920x1080) at work and I have the older LG 2452T (1920x1200, not the nancy 1080 version) at home.

Both have a good quality image, but I'd always go for the 1920x1200 version of a monitor, especially above 20". The 1080p models are fine for watching television and film, but when sitting up close, the image is too large and too coarse compared to a 1920x1200 panel.

i take it the 1920x1200 is the 16:10 version, theres some more research for me to do

after a friend tipped me off about the LED monitors they look pretty amazing, so im looking to get one that has a LED backlight

Yep, LED are pretty amazing, so are the prices.

hehe yea

ok ive narrowed it down to 3

http://reviews.cnet.com/4504-4_7-0.html ... ag=compare

im worried about the dell SP2309W because, the samsung with that res gave me bad eye strain, but im putting that down to the blur

im worried about the dell G2410 because, its 5ms response time so im worried that might cause blur =z

the samsung XL2370 & dell G2410 are both LED's tho and the dell had flawless image quality, but they are both very hard to get hold of on decent online sites, the dell SP2309W on the other hand is cheeper and easier for me to get, but will be hit or miss in the end; and the dell customer support is absolute crap from what ive heard with people who can barley talk english (BT was bad enough)

so i either wait it out for the LED's to become more common or try my luck with the SP2309W